You must log in or register to comment.

the_oalrus wrote

I dont see a way out of this as long as people are hooked on free tech. Without finding some way for users to at least pay for servers and most likely a degree of development, surveillance capitalism will prevail.

I am interested in creating a mutalism system that is based on voluntary micro-transactions between creators and consumers. And since in the digital realm everyone occupies both roles at different time I think it lends naturally to a self-sustaining community.


DissidentRage wrote

There is also the problem that these systems just make things really easy, and for the general populace, without really overt consequences they will continue to use these services in complete apathy for what they do. Worse is they hamper those of us who are aware of these things and do have a problem with the way they work, because those people make use of those services a prerequisite to keep in touch with them.


the_oalrus wrote

Yeh, i totally agree and i dont think that's a winnable battle. My hope is to build a coalition of the motivated and a movement of idealists to get a nexus of a community. But to win the masses it has to be easier, 'cognitively cheaper', and better content/more entertaining to win. Check out if you are interested. Or the blog I am still working on editing


mofongo wrote

That term is redundant and users useless. We've known for centuries that capitalism turn everything into a commodity to bought and sold in markets, the analyses the article mention were already being done in advertisement and propaganda. Just because all this is now happening on a computer does not make it different specially when the only difference is scale and cheapness.

And their solution is disgusting, 'wider discussion'?, we need to burn that shit down.